Superoxidant Poiser For Groundwater And Soil Treatment With In-Situ Oxidation-Reduction And Acidity-Basicity Adjustment

ABSTRACT

Equipment and process by which an operator can set (or program) a time sequence of coatings of oxygen with increasing oxidation potential for in-situ treatment (chemical reaction) of organic compounds ranging from superoxidation (catalyzed ozone) to reduction conditions involving hydrogen sulfide gas is described. The equipment makes use of oxygen in a combination of gaseous and liquid forms to produce microbubbles of, e.g., different composition of oxygen forms possessing peroxides, superoxides, and hydroperoxides with increasing oxidative potential. The oxidative potential of the reactive mixture can be set to more cost-effectively degrade byproducts of contaminant decomposition without reformulation and reinjection. A secondary advantage comes with in-situ adjustment of pH or acidity/basicity.

RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No.10/895,015, filed Jul. 20, 2004, the contents of which are incorporatedherein by reference in its entirety.

BACKGROUND

This invention relates generally to water remediation systems andtechniques.

There is a well-recognized need for removal of subsurface contaminantsthat exist in aquifers and surrounding soils. Such contaminants caninclude various man-made volatile hydrocarbons including chlorinatedhydrocarbons, e.g., volatile organic compounds such as chlorinatedolefins including trichloroethene (TCE), tetrachloroethene (PCE), cis1,2-dichloroethene and vinyl chloride. Other compounds include aromaticor polyaromatic ring compounds such as benzene, toluene, methylbenzene,xylenes, naphthalene, and propellants or explosives such asnitroanilines, trinitrotoluene, and so forth. The groups of compoundsare characterized by aromatic ring structures also include alkylsubstituted aromatic hydrocarbons.

SUMMARY

Effective treatment may involve not only oxidation but also adjustmentof Eh and pH back to original aquifer conditions.

With current practices of in-situ oxidation, an aqueous chemical mixturewith a known oxidation potential, such as hydrogen peroxide, hydrogenperoxide plus ferrous iron (a Fenton's Reagent), permanganate and soforth is injected into unsaturated or groundwater saturated soil toinduce a fixed chemical oxidation reaction. If the oxidant is suppliedin sufficient excess quantity to react with the target organicsubstrate, the reaction ensues and yields a set of expected products,primarily carbon dioxide (CO₂), water, and oxygen (O₂). However, withsome contaminants undesirable byproducts can be formed. In thatinstance, the applier generally reformulates a new mixture or procedureto provide reactions having more desirable end products. Therefore,multiple injections of different mixtures may result in much highercosts of treatment than were initially anticipated by the applier.

Reactions such as oxidation or reduction focused on aqueous or adsorbedorganic compounds also produce side reactions with the soil or bedrockmatrix. Metallic or nonmetallic cations such as iron (Fe⁺² or Fe⁺³),manganese (Mn⁺² or Mn⁺⁴), calcium (Ca⁺²), copper (Cu⁺² and Cu⁺¹),chromium (Cr⁺³ and Cr⁺⁶), and so forth, under oxidation or reduction canbecome involved in secondary reactions. The control of undesirablecompeting oxidation/reduction (redox) reactions can be accomplished bylimiting the mass or strength of oxidation or by actively reversing theredox condition by programmed combinations of gases and/or liquids.

According to an aspect of the present invention, a method includesreceiving a signal from a sensor and determining an oxidation potentialof a soil/water formation based on the signal from the sensor. Themethod also includes selecting an oxidant based on the determinedoxidation potential to introduce the oxidant into the soil/waterformation under conditions to allow for adjustment of the determinedoxidation potential of the soil/water formation.

According to an additional aspect of the invention, an apparatusincludes a mechanism to deliver oxidant and fluid to a microporousdiffuser and a diffuser that allows delivery of the oxidant and thefluid to a soil formation. The diffuser and mechanism are arranged suchthat one of the oxidant and fluid forms a coating over the other of theoxidant and fluid. The apparatus also includes a controller responsiveto a signal that corresponds to a determined oxidation potential of thesoil formation. The controller produces a signal that causes theapparatus to couple to the diffuser a source of oxidant selected from aplurality of sources of oxidant of differing oxidant potential, toadjust and maintain a selected molar ratio of oxidant to contaminantpresent in the soil formation.

According to an additional aspect of the invention, an apparatusincludes a microporous diffuser and a mechanism to deliver an oxidant ora reductant to the microporous diffuser. The apparatus also includes acontroller that is responsive to a signal that corresponds to adetermined oxidation-reduction potential of the soil formation to selectoxidant or reductant to deliver to the microporous diffuser to adjust amolar ratio of the oxidant or reductant to contaminant present in thesoil formation.

According to an additional aspect of the invention, an apparatusincludes a first mechanism to deliver oxidant to a first microporousdiffuser and a second mechanism to deliver a liquid to a secondmicroporous diffuser. The apparatus also includes a first microporousdiffuser that allows delivery of the oxidant and liquid to a soilformation. From the first microporous diffuser the liquid forms acoating over the oxidant. The apparatus includes a second microporousdiffuser that allows delivery of the oxidant to the soil formation. Inthe formation, the second microporous diffuser is arranged relative tothe first microporous diffuser, to allow the second microporous diffuserto release oxidant under the liquid coated oxidant. The apparatus alsoincludes a controller responsive to a signal that corresponds to adetermined oxidation potential of the soil formation to adjust andmaintain a selected molar ratio of oxidant to contaminant present in thesoil formation.

According to an additional aspect of the invention, an apparatusincludes a first mechanism to deliver a reductant to a first microporousdiffuser and a second mechanism to deliver a liquid to a secondmicroporous diffuser. The apparatus includes a first microporousdiffuser that allows delivery of the reductant and liquid to a soilformation with the liquid forming a coating over the reductant. Theapparatus also includes a second microporous diffuser that allowsdelivery of the reductant to the soil formation with the secondmicroporous diffuser to release reductant under the liquid-coatedreductant. The apparatus includes a controller responsive to a signalthat corresponds to a determined oxidation potential of the soilformation to adjust and maintain a selected molar ratio of reductant tocontaminant present in the soil formation.

One or more of the following advantages may be provided by one or moreaspects of the invention.

With the apparatus and process the operator can control the rates ofoxidation and subsequent reduction in the aquifer and as well as thematrix chemistry of the aquifer, despite changes in horizontal velocity,background mineral deposit variation, and residual inorganic byproductformation. The coordinate matrix chemistry of the aquifer, particularlythe surface matrix anion/cation surface participates in aqueous redoxreactions, despite having its own buffering capacity from stored amountsof iron, silicates, carbonates or sulfates, and can be adjusted duringor following redox reactions. This allows the use of very strongoxidants or, conversely, very strong reductant gases, such as nitrogenor helium diluted hydrogen (to avoid explosive conditions) or hydrogensulfide for short periods of time followed by redox adjustment back,close to preexisting conditions.

The programmable logic controller (PLC) is supplied with the total massof oxidant required to oxidize the contaminants of concern and soiloxidative demand (SOD) and an appropriate ratio of gas to liquid. Theunit programs the time sequence of additions of mass. Feedback into thePLC from the pH, ORP probe in the aquifer is used to modify the rate ofadditions or schedule additions of reductive treatment following theoxidative mass completion to bring the aquifer back into balance(poising) at a prescribed oxidation/reduction potential (ORP).

The details of one or more embodiments of the invention are set forth inthe accompanying drawings and the description below. Other features,objects, and advantages of the invention will be apparent from thedescription and drawings, and from the claims.

DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

FIG. 1A is a diagram depicting an apparatus for recirculation wellsystem.

FIG. 1B is a diagram depicting an apparatus for a dual point wellsystem.

FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of gas and liquid delivery and controlsystem.

FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram of gas and liquid delivery and controlsystem.

FIGS. 4A and 4B are block diagrams depicting exemplary computer-basedcontrollers.

FIG. 4C is a flow chart depicting a typical process flow.

FIGS. 5-9 are diagrams depicting various treatment configurations.

FIG. 10 is a diagram of oxidation-reduction potentials of compounds andexemplary target compounds.

FIG. 11 is a schematic of a microbubble showing gas/aqueous/solidtriangle partitioning coefficients.

FIG. 12 is a diagram depicting primary and secondary reactions of ozonewith MTBE.

FIG. 13 is a Pourbaix diagram of chromium species with range of Eh/pHobserved with ozone injector.

FIG. 14 is a Pourbaix diagram of iron species with range of Eh/pHobserved with microbubble injector.

FIG. 15 is a diagram depicting stable species composition in aqueouscondition.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Referring to FIG. 1A, an example for a treatment system 10 to treatcontaminants in a subsurface aquifer 12 includes an sparging apparatus14 that is disposed through a soil formation 16. In this arrangement,the sparging apparatus 14 is disposed through a soil formation 16 e.g.,a vadose zone 16 a and an underlying aquifer 12. The sparging apparatus14 includes a casing 18 that is positioned through a borehole disposedthrough the soil formation 16. The casing 18 has an inlet screen 18 adisposed on an upper portion thereof and an outlet screen 18 b disposedon a bottom portion thereof. Disposed through the casing 18 is a firstmicroporous diffuser 50 a. Alternatively, a slotted well-screen could beused. In some embodiments, the microporous diffuser 50 a is a laminatemicroporous diffuser. A second microporous diffuser 50 b is disposed ina borehole that is below the borehole containing the casing 18, and issurrounded by a sand pack and isolated by Bentonite or a grout layerfrom the borehole that has the first microporous diffuser 50 a. Alsodisposed in the casing is a packer 17 that isolates the upper screen 18a from the lower screen 18 b and appropriate piping to connect sourcesof decontamination agents to the microporous diffusers 50 a, 50 b. Whenfluid is injected through the microporous diffusers 50 a, 50 b thepacker 17, screens 18 a, 18 b and a water pump 19 enable are-circulation water pattern 13 to be produced in the soil formation.

As shown in FIG. 1B, other arrangements are possible. For instance, thearrangement could use two microporous diffusers packed in a sand pack,e.g., a 60 mesh sand pack and which are separated by a Bentonite layer.This arrangement is an example of a non-recirculation arrangement thus,obviating the need for the packer for instance. Still other arrangementsare possible.

The arrangement 10 (or 10′) also includes apparatus 25 including agaseous decontaminate apparatus 30, which in some embodiments is anoxidizer apparatus and in others is a reducing apparatus and a liquidsupply apparatus 40, which in some embodiments is an oxidizer apparatusand in others is a reducing apparatus. The gaseous decontaminateapparatus 30 and liquid supply apparatus 40 include a control system aswill be discussed below.

Referring to FIG. 2, a simplified view of either arrangement of FIGS. 1Aor 1B or other arrangements is shown with apparatus 25 including thegaseous decontaminate apparatus 30 and liquid supply apparatus 40coupled to one of the microporous diffusers, e.g., 50 a and 50 b. Thegaseous decontaminate apparatus 30 is shown as an oxidizing apparatus 30having several inlets that are supplied via different gas sources Gas1-Gas 4 and several outlets that provide different outputs from the gassources Gas 1-Gas 4. In addition, the liquid supply apparatus 40 isshown as an oxidizing apparatus having several inlets that are suppliedvia different liquid sources Liquid 1-Liquid 3 and several outlets thatprovide different outputs from the liquid sources Liquid 1-Liquid 3. Ifused in the arrangement of FIG. 1A or 1B, the outputs of the oxidizerapparatus 30 and the liquid supply apparatus 40 would be coupled to bothof the microporous diffusers 50 a, 50 b, however for simplicity only oneof the diffusers is shown. Alternatively, only one or more than two themicroporous diffusers could be used in a common well arrangement.

Referring to FIG. 3, the apparatus 25 including the gaseousdecontaminate apparatus 30 and liquid supply apparatus 40 are shown. Thegaseous decontaminate apparatus 30 is shown as an oxidizer apparatus andincludes oxidizing sources (four being shown) 31 a-31 d, a manifold 32 aand an air compressor 35 a, e.g., pump that feeds a gas mixture to amanifold 35 b that distributes the mixture to the microporous diffusers50 a, 50 b, as well as other microporous diffusers in different wells(not shown). Generally, the gas sources on the oxidative side can beair, oxygen, ozone, and nitrogen oxide, or nitrogen dioxide. Some of thesources can be supplied via the ambient air, e.g., an oxygen generatorand an ozone generator can be used to supply oxygen and ozone from air,a nitrogen filter can be used to supply nitrogen, whereas others can besupplied from bottled sources, e.g., nitrogen oxide. The sources areconnected to the manifold 32 a via solenoid-controlled valves that arecontrolled via a controller 37.

Alternatively, in some applications the sources can be reducingmaterials. As reducing materials, gases can be hydrogen sulfide (H₂S),hydrogen (diluted with nitrogen or helium), or sulfur dioxide (SO₂) andwould be substituted for the sources 31 a-31 d. Some of the sources canbe supplied via the ambient air, e.g., a nitrogen filter can be used tosupply nitrogen, whereas others can be supplied from bottled sources,e.g., hydrogen gas, helium-hydrogen or nitrogen-hydrogen gas mixture.

A similar arrangement is provided for the liquid supply apparatus 40.The liquid supply apparatus 40 includes liquid sources (four beingshown) 33 a-33 d, a manifold 32 b and pump 37 a that feeds a liquidmixture to a manifold 37 b that distributes the liquid mixture to themicroporous diffusers 50 a, 50 b, as well as other microporous diffusersin different wells (not shown). Generally, the liquid sources on theoxidative side can be hydrogen peroxide, a hydro-peroxide that is asubstantial by-product of reaction of a target contaminant with the gas,e.g., ozone and water, superoxides, ozonides, or a permanganate(potassium or sodium) solution. The sources are connected to themanifold 32 b via solenoid-controlled valves that are controlled via thecontroller 37.

Alternatively, in some applications the sources can be reducingmaterials. As reducing materials, the liquids can be sodium dithionate,sodium thiosulfate ferrous sulfate, or ferrous sulfite and would besubstituted for the sources 33 a-33 c.

In some embodiments, the gaseous decontaminate apparatus 30 includes aremote process monitor (not shown) that communicates with the controller37. A pH oxidation reduction potential (ORP) or DO sensor 39 istypically disposed in a monitoring well within the zone of influence ofthe sparging well, e.g., about half of the radius of the zone ofinfluence. The sensor 39 senses the oxidation potential and pH of thesurrounding soil formation during operation of the equipment and sendsdata back to the controller to adjust and maintain material flow toprovide a concomitant adjustment in the oxidation potential and pH ofthe formation.

An ozone monitor 35 c is disposed in the oxidizer apparatus 30 tomonitor for adverse ozone conditions in the equipment.

The liquid supply apparatus 40 also includes a liquid level sensor, (notshown) to monitor liquid level in the sources. The water, hydrogenperoxide or other hydroperoxides are provided via sources.Alternatively, hydrogen peroxide or ozone can be generated from water ina container by applying electricity to electrodes in the container,instead of using a prepared solution.

One approach would be to start the system with peroxide-coated bubbles,which can readily degrade PAHs and switched to sodium permanganate asorganics show reduction to one-third original concentrations. Thisapproach could substantially reduce the SOD (soil oxidant demand)requirement of the permanganate system while providing long-termresidual oxidation of chloroethenes for instance. Because permanganateis transported with microbubbles, as discussed below it is activelydispersed rather than relying on density alone to distribute thepermanganate.

Also supplied to the microporous diffusers are promoters or nutrients,as well as catalyst agents 42 including iron containing compounds suchas iron silicates, ferrous iron, acetic acid, or palladium containingcompounds such as palladized carbon or other transition metals in acidsolution. In addition, other materials such as platinum mayalternatively be used. The promoters or nutrients are introduced withthe hydroperoxides. The hydroperoxides are also produced by reactionsthat decompose the contaminants. In the presence of the hydroperoxides,the promoters or nutrients can combine with the hydroperoxides topromote and accelerate the decomposition reactions.

The mixture of air/ozone affects substantial removal of contaminantssuch as various man-made volatile hydrocarbons including chlorinatedhydrocarbons, chlorinated olefins such as tetrachloroethylene,trichloroethylene, cis 1,2-dichloroethene and vinyl chloride and othercompounds e.g., aromatic ring compounds, propellants, explosives, and soforth that are found as contaminants.

The electronic and mechanical system to control the sparging apparatus10 or 10′ includes a gas pump and a liquid pump that are controlled viaa mechanical time sequencer, or computer based controller, as discussedbelow, either of which is programmed to deliver a selected mass of eachmaterial per unit time producing a mixture of predetermined oxidationpotential. The oxidation potential, the mass/time, pressure, and timesequence are set electronically. An oxygen generator feeds an ozonegenerator, allowing the ratio of ozone to oxygen to be set. The liquiddelivered is water and hydroperoxide.

Referring now to FIGS. 4A and 4B the control process allows an operatorto set or program a time sequence for varying degree of oxidationpotential of the mixture for the in-situ treatment. Various approachescan be used to provide the controller for the system.

In one example, a dedicated single board computer could be used (FIG.4A). The controller would receive signals from the operator and sensorsand produce outputs that would be used to control peripheral relays toactivate the valves and the compressor.

Another implementation of the control function would be to use a modularprogrammable logic controller (PLC) (FIG. 4B). One advantage would bethe ability to easily size the control function to match the scale of aninstallation. If more wells were desired, additional modules could beadded. In a PLC based implementation, an A/D converter could beconnected to analog sensors to receive the signals from the sensors. TheA/D converter could send the signals to inputs of a digital I/Ointerface module. The I/O module would be used to send signals tocontrol the valves and compressor. A coprocessor module would addcomputational power to the control arrangement but may not be requiredin all systems. If telephone or wireless control or monitoring isrequired, a communications module and associated peripheral may be addedas desired. Other arrangements are possible. For instance, a personalcomputer (PC) could be used.

Referring to FIG. 4C, a typical process flow control 70 is shown. Thecontroller would be programmed to allow the apparatus to selectdifferent sources of oxidant or oxidant potentials according to readingsfrom sensor(s) disposed in a zone of influence of the apparatus. Thecontroller receives 72 a reading from the sensors and determines the Eh(oxidation-reduction) potential 74 of the formation. Initial thesoil/groundwater matrix may be at reducing conditions (−100 mv), whichcan occur in initial phases of treatment in the presence of bacterialdegradation of the spilled organics that have depleted the originaldissolved oxygen. If the soil is at a reducing condition, the processflow 70 sends a signal to the apparatus to select 76 a strong oxidant,e.g., ozone and hydrogen peroxide, ozone, or dissolve ozone or hydrogenperoxide, to feed into the microporous diffusers. Similarly if the Eh ofthe formation is above about +400 mv indicating an excessive oxidantcondition, the controller signals the apparatus to select 78 a weakoxidant potential material, such as oxygen or if the Eh is above, 1000mv e.g., the controller signals the apparatus to select 80 a reducingagent, e.g., hydrogen gas or hydrogen sulfide gas, as appropriate. Ifthe process 70 determines that, the potential is two-tailed, e.g., lyingwithin a range of greater than about −100 mv and less than about +400 mvthe process checks the pH.

The process 70 determines 82 the pH (acid-base) of the formation. If theformation has a pH of about 5.0 or less, i.e., it is too acidic, theprocess 70 signals the apparatus to select 84 a basic type oxidant,which can be any of the oxidants mentioned and which is supplied with amaterial to raise the pH of the soil formation, such as carbon dioxide.If the formation has a pH of about 7.0, i.e., it is neutral, the process70 signals the apparatus to select 86 a neutral type oxidant, e.g., theoxidant material. If the formation has a pH of about 8.0 or less, i.e.,it is slightly basic, the process 70 signals the apparatus to select 88an acidic oxidant. If the formation is has a pH of about 8.0 or more,i.e., it is too basic, the process 70 signals the apparatus to select 90an acidic type reductant. After selecting the appropriateoxidant/reducant material, the gas/liquids are delivered 92 to thediffusion apparatus, e.g., microporous diffusers.

Advantages of the apparatus 10 include the ability to adjust thechemical oxidation capacity of the treatment material to the organiccontaminant mixture present in the soil being treated. The apparatus 10also provides the ability to adjust the concentration (mass delivery) ofthe treatment material to match the mass of contaminant. The apparatus10 adjusts the thickness of bubble to change density of nano/microbubble(buoyancy) and reactive surface film. In addition, the apparatus 10 canadjust pressure of pulsing (e.g., amplitude/pressure wave) to drivemicro/nanobubbles through the formation.

Other features include the ability to adjust duration of pulse (wavelength) to improve dispersion and bubble mixture, and to adjust timesequence or alternate oxidation state or species involved (PLC or simplesequencer control). The apparatus 10 delivers different compositions oftreatment material on a fixed or selective schedule (e.g., via aprogrammable sensor feedback mechanism) by Eh/ORP (oxidation-reduction)and/or pH (acid-base) monitors disposed in the treatment site, e.g.,aquifer, soil formation and so forth. Eh is the electromotive force,(e-potential) when measured on a Calumel electrode, whereas ORP(oxidation reduction potential) is more of a chemist's discussion ofstability of reaction kinetics. Essentially these two quantities, Eh andORP are measuring the same characteristics.

Additionally, the apparatus 10 adjusts the Eh (oxidation-reduction)and/or pH (acid-base) of a formation for control of soil matrix anionsand cations. With segregation of location of injection, reactants cancome together by injection of microbubbles below the coating material,using buoyancy to displace the bubbles through the coating material.

The apparatus 10 allows oxygen in various combinations of gaseous andliquid forms to produce microbubbles of different composition of oxygenforms including hydroxides, superoxides, and hydroperoxides havingincreasing oxidative potential. The oxidative potential of the reactivemixture is set to more cost-effectively degrade the byproducts of thedecomposition of the contaminants without reformulation andre-injection. The degree of oxidative potential that is needed isdetermined based on various techniques such as laboratory bench-scalepressure-slurry tests and review of ORP limits based on Eh/pH diagrams(Pourbaix) of undesirable byproducts.

The adjustment of oxidation potential (i.e., reducing capacity) providesthe ability to adjust the coordinate chemistry of the soil/water matrixto the correct reduction/oxidation (redox) condition and pH and targetcompounds to be decomposed without producing side effects of unwantedbyproducts, such as transferring trivalent chromium to hexavalentchromium while decomposing polyaromatic hydrocarbons.

Initially, the soil/groundwater matrix is often at reducing conditions(−100 mv) in the presence of bacterial degradation of the spilledorganics that have depleted the original dissolved oxygen. The capacityto decompose the poly aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), e.g., 3 or morearomatic rings, requires reaching an oxidation potential sufficientlyhigh to break the bond structure, but low enough to prevent undesirableside reactions with the mineral matrix.

The capability of adjustment of oxidation potential can be used to treatsoils having polyaromatic hydrocarbons, where the parent compound ispoorly soluble in water, but fragments with simpler benzene rings (e.g.,BTEX, phenols, aromatic carboxylic acids, and so forth) may be VOCs withsignificantly higher solubility.

A less efficient technique to introduce liquid would include separatinggas introduction and liquid introduction in the substrate by usingsand-packing around a central gas introduction tube or by sequentiallyflooding the region with liquid, like peroxide, above or around a singlepoint and sending a fine bubble stream through a fine diffuser throughthe mixture. A secondary siphon-effect could be developed but theuniformity of coating would not be as controlled.

Formation of a superoxidant occurs with several approaches programmed todeliver to a formation. These approaches include the following:

1. Ozone and peroxide

2. Ozone and ferrous iron

3. Ozone/peroxide and ferrous iron, which can occur by leaching from amicroporous diffuser, e.g., a Spargepoint® (from Kerfoot Technologies,Inc.) that has ferrous iron introduced in its hydrophilic packing; addedto the ozone and peroxide as a liquid amendment; added from naturaloccurrence of ferrous iron in a reduced aquifer.

In the above cases, the byproducts of reaction end as innocuous naturalproducts typically O₂, H₂O, or Fe³⁺.

Clean oxidation reactions are important in environmental chemistry. Alarge number of compounds can be oxidized by contacting them with formsof oxygen in the liquid and adsorbed phase at moderate temperatures.This type of reaction, liquid-phase, free-radical oxidation, orauto-oxidation, is an important process in the chemical industry or as acause of deterioration of many materials exposed to air, ozone, orsunlight-produced free radicals such as the hydroperoxides.

The capacity of a form of oxygen to initiate an oxidation reaction isoften referred to as its oxidation potential, presented in anelectrochemical table form with its half reaction. The more complex anorganic molecule is, the higher the oxidation potential that is requiredto allow a reaction involving the molecule to proceed. Fordisassociation of any molecule requires a cleavage of a hydrogen-carbonbond (relatively easy) or a carbon-carbon bond (relatively difficult,especially with increasing stability of double bonds in aromaticcompounds). The ease with which the reaction begins depends upon thestrength of the bond and the oxidative potential of the oxygen molecule.The objective in most reactions is to break down the substrate compoundinto simpler carbon fragments (like alcohols or carboxylic acids) thatcan be readily mineralized (directly transform to CO₂ and H₂O) or bemetabolized by bacteria or the end product like CO₂.

FIGS. 5-9 show that the apparatus 10 can be configured in various waysto provide different configurations of delivery of treatment material.

FIG. 5 shows a composite Laminar microporous diffuser arrangement (e.g.,a Laminar Spargepoint described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,436,285 and6,582,611 or obtainable from Kerfoot Technologies, Inc.) that producesan outside discharge of air/ozone bubbles having a coating of hydrogenperoxide or a hydroperoxide.

FIG. 6 shows a central water flow through an inverted cylindricalmicroporous diffuser, e.g., a Spargepoint with an interior discharge(nozzle). The arrangement involves the discharge of water through thecenter of a microporous double cylinder with a non-permeable sheath. Thegas enters an outer zone between an outermost plastic or stainless steelbarrier and an inner microporous (0.5 to 200 micron) cylinder includingsupport material (rings or mesh) and flows towards the center. Liquid isdrawn into a microporous hydrophilic layer and coats a gas streampassing there through. The liquid and gas flows may be subject topulsing (±5 psi) of their flows at frequent intervals (e.g., 0.5 to 10times/sec) to provide an internal shear as the bubbles exit against theshearing force from the water or liquid velocity. With this arrangementnano to micro-size bubbles can be produced to flow in a water stream outfrom a well screen (either recirculated vertically or provided fromsurface tank, flowing outwards or towards a laterally-located withdrawalwell).

FIG. 7 shows a vertical separation of a hydroperoxide layer with loweroxygen release. In the arrangement of FIG. 7, vertical separation occursbetween the cylinders of liquid introduction and gas introduction. Themicroporous gas generator is placed below the liquid generator so thatthe rising microbubbles pass through the liquid addition. Theintroduction cylinders can be segregated or supplied by a line passingthrough the center of the other. In either case, the bubbles rise whilethe denser upper liquid falls. A feed tubing arrangement can beconfigured with a line inside a line or by parallel tubes with anexternal sheath that is either wrapped or molded about the tubes.

This arrangement can be used with ozone/hydroperoxide or ozone/ferrousiron since both liquids are denser than water and will drift downwardsas the bubbles rise. Nitrous oxide could also be added to the ozone gasstream to accelerate certain organic oxidations.

FIG. 8 shows another vertical separation scheme, this one involving aferrous layer and lower oxygen release. This arrangement can be used forthe injection of oxygen and ozone into naturally occurring ferrous ironsolutions in ground water. These commonly occur when bacterial anaerobicdecomposition prevails, and the matrix Eh drops below, e.g., −50 mv.Ozone injected into ground water under these conditions will react torelease the hydroxyl radical, catalyzing a more rapid decomposition ofalkanes (TOH) in residual fuel spills (e.g., gasoline, diesel, or #2fuel oil). The injection of ferrous iron through well screens (0.010slot) can provide a continuous supply to react with the ozonemicrobubbles (as in FIG. 7). Ferrous iron cannot be added through adouble microporous point as in A or B because of Fe⁺³ clogging, unlessnitrogen gas substitutes for oxygen and carbon dioxide in normal air.

FIG. 9 depicts a composite (Laminar) Spargepoint with outside dischargefor use in a reduction treatment condition. In this configuration,reducing gas (H₂S) and/or reducing liquid (sodium dithionate) are addedto reduce the Eh of the aquifer and to precipitate solubilized(mobilized) metal species (hexavalent chromate, copper, zinc, arsenic).Nitrogen from air is supplied as a carrier gas by a nitrogen generator(molecular sieve separator) or by a tank. Microporous diffusers e.g., asin scheme A or B can be used with this system.

The schemes can be used in combination. For example, the Scheme of FIG.5 can be used to remove MTBE/BTEX and TPH from gasoline fuel spills.However, if oxidant is added too rapidly producing dissolved hexavalentchromium, the unit can turn on the scheme in FIG. 9 to reduce the Ehbelow, e.g., 400 mv, to remove the hexavalent chromium by reversing theequilibrium of trivalent to hexavalent (see Pourbaix diagram, FIG. 13).

If a plume of complex substrate material is approaching a treatmentcontainment line with expected different arrival times, the unit couldbe set to deliver the necessary oxidation potential and mass which wouldbe needed for each fraction as it arrives.

The use of liquid and gas mixtures allows injection where a pulsedpressure is applied to the microporous diffuser, producing a negativepressure, which siphons in liquid to contact the gas surface ofresulting microbubbles. The microbubbles are ejected into groundwaterwithin soils or surface waters with sediments to contact the organiccontaminants. The pulse pressure is set to fall within 1 to 40 psi aboveambient pressure at the location of injection. The duration ranges canbe for instance from a few minutes e.g., 5 or so to 100 minutes or more.

In FIG. 6, oxygen from a molecular sieve separator (generator) is sentthrough an ozone generator (Corona tube) and diluted with air beforeentering the central chamber of the microporous diffuser. Peroxideliquid is pulled into the surrounding hydrophilic microporous materialby suction, often passing through a metering pump to deliver the correctmass to the strength of the gases. The gases are normally pulsed on andoff at suitable pressures (e.g., 15 minutes, 10 psi) to promotedispersion through the saturated or unsaturated soils.

An electronic sequencer of the gas system has solenoid controlled valvesof the controller connected with liquid-carrying solenoid controlledvalves of the liquid metering pump. The ratio of air from the compressorto gas type (O₂ or O₃) is programmed to provide a mass of gas, whichwhen combined with the liquid type, yields a mass in grams/hr (e.g., 10gms/hr) at a certain oxidative potential (e.g., 2.8 volts). Followinginitial injection of a peroxide-coated ozone mixture with uncoated ozonemay more effectively remove the dissolved fraction, since the injectionof high oxidative potential oxygen, e.g., superoxides, O•, may breakaromatic rings but produce a large mass of soluble aromatic fractions ingroundwater. Using the programmable controller to cycle between the twomay be desirable. An exemplary cycle can be one day, 2.8 volts and twodays, 2.07 volts, with the cycle repeated until a sufficient quantity ofthe adsorbed PAH mass is removed.

The laminar microporous diffusers, U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,436,285 and6,582,611 or obtainable from Kerfoot Technologies, Inc. (gas/liquidSpargepoints®) or equivalents, deliver gas and liquid to porous zones(vadose or saturated). The microporous diffuser produces microbubblesthat siphon a liquid coating, as bubbles pulsed through capillary pores,yielding a water/coating liquid/gas/coating liquid/water peristaltictransport through microscopic capillary pores of the soil. The greaterthe hydrostatic pressure existing on the microporous diffuser, thehigher the siphoning pressure produced. This indicates that with Boyle'sLaw of Increased Pressure, the smaller the internal volume of the bubblecauses a concomitant enlargement of the microbubble due to capillary(meniscus) pressure to accommodate a higher surface area of themicrobubble (or microcylinder) in the capillaries.

The cylindrical microporous diffuser, in which the gas is sent throughthe center of the microporous diffuser and through micropores across asandwiched hydrophobic microporous layer connected to the liquid supply,is the most efficient approach to produce the flow. The intense negativepressure developed during operation occurs without any pump powerprovided. A metering mechanism is desirable to maintain a constant flowof liquid, but if sufficient volume is not supplied, the liquid can besubjected to sufficient vacuum pressure to produce boiling (degassing)of the liquid. A vacuum relief check valve for each liquid source can beused to increase flow during these conditions.

Areas of soils containing petroleum products or spilled solvents can betreated to an extraordinary degree of efficiency, with removalefficiencies approaching stoichiometric ratios. The gases, particularlyozone, are efficiently dispersed throughout the treatment area.Half-life of ozone ranges from 10 to 30 hours following injection iscommonly expected, which is 10 to 30 times' previously expectedhalf-life ranges.

Referring to FIG. 10, the oxidative capacity of the system can beadjusted to deliver a maximum mixture approaching or slightly exceeding2.8 volts, capable of breaking down polycyclic aromatic compounds, likenaphthalenes, anthracenes, phenanthrenes, and chrysene relativelyeasily. As these compounds are broken down, the oxidative capacity ofthe apparatus is programmed so as not to exceed 400 mv ORP in thesaturated soil to avoid producing hexavalent chromium from trivalentchromium present as mineral surface coatings on the soil matrix,particularly with weathered bedrock. After sufficient oxidation, theregion is purged with H₂S gas to bring the aquifer back to its originalORP/pH. If neutralization is necessary because of chlorinated solventdecomposition (to HCl, dilute hydrochloric acid), carbon dioxide can beadded from the air or a cylinder to produce bicarbonates and carbonatesto raise the pH to the original condition. In some instances purging theregion with nitrogen gas (to remove excess CO₂ or O₂) will allow thesoil matrix to revert to its original condition.

The system uses air-ozone sparging where bubbles of air-ozone areinjected into treatment areas. When air is bubbled through ground waterin soil pores, dissolved VOCs transfer from the liquid to gas phase inaccordance with Henry's Law.

The microporous diffusers, e.g., a C-Sparger® microporous diffuser,produce extremely small “microbubbles” (0.3 to 200 micron) with a veryhigh surface area-to-volume ratio. This high surface area-to-volumeratio maximizes VOC transfer from the liquid phase to the gas phase. Ifthe air bubbles contain sufficient ozone for decomposition, the VOCsreact with the ozone and are destroyed while still in the water column.

With MTBE decomposition, hydrogen peroxide is released, producing an OH•radical coating that also speeds reaction. This in situ combined VOCrecovery and destruction not only obviates the need for an additionalprocess step, but also enhances the physical and chemical kinetics ofthe process.

For field applications, the process engineer defines the oxidantrequirement for the site based on factors such as the stoichiometricoxidation requirements for the chemicals of concern, the soil oxidantdemand (SOD), the aqueous oxidant needs for metals carbonates, andsulfides, and the in situ decomposition rate of the ozone.

While not being bound by theory, the theory section below provides apractical technique to determine stoichiometric oxidant demand. Thisoxidant demand computation procedure is contrasted with the time tocompletion of treatment at a spill site.

Theory

When ozone is bubbled into an aqueous solution containing dissolvedVOCs, ozonation may occur in either the aqueous phase or the gas phase.Whether the VOC transfers into the ozone-containing bubble and isdestroyed, in the gas phase, or the ozone dissolves in the water aroundthe skim surface of the bubble and destroys the VOC in the aqueous phaseis primarily dependent upon the rate of reaction of each VOC with ozone.Table 1A shows the oxidation capacity of different ozone states comparedwith those of other common oxidants. Table 1B shows the reductionpotential of common reduction agents.

TABLE 1A Oxidation Potential Catalyzed Ozone (OH•) 2.80 V Fenton'sReagent 2.76 V Ozone (Gas) 2.42 V Ozone (Molecular) 2.07 V Permanganate1.67 V Nitrous Oxide 1.59 V Hydrogen Peroxide 1.50 V

TABLE 1B Reduction Potential Hydrogen (gas) −2.23 Sulfite (SO₃ ²⁻) −1.12Ferrous (Fe²⁺) −.41

Referring to FIG. 11, a view of organic oxidation reactions andpartitioning environment in a microbubble for ozone-initiated reactionsis shown. In accordance with Henry's Law, dissolved VOCs are driven intoa gas phase and the gaseous ozone is driven into an aqueous phase. Thiswill result in various reactions occurring at the bubble-liquidinterface, whether in the gas-film or liquid-film of the bubble. Whetherthe primary decomposition reaction is occurring in the gaseous or liquidphase, oxygenates are driven by partitioning into the bubbleenvironment. The smaller the bubble, the greater the surface-to-volumeratio and ability to “strip” volatile organics (Kerfoot, et al., TenthAnnual Outdoor Actions Conference National Groundwater AssociationColumbus OH pp 77-97 (1996).

The thin film theory of Henley and Seader (1981) Equilibrium StateSeparation Operations in Chemical Engineering Chapter 16, John White andSons, New York, N.Y., as summarized in Kerfoot (2002) Kerfoot, W. B.“Microbubble Ozone Sparging for Chlorinated Ethene Spill Remediation.”In: Innovative Strategies for the Remediation of Chlorinated Solventsand DNAPLS in the Subsurface American Chemical Society, Division ofEnvironmental Chemistry, Washington, D.C. describes the mass transfer ofa reactant across a liquid and a gas film before it contacts the otherreactant.

MTBE has a Henry's Constant of 6.9E-04 atm m^(3/mol, about) ⅛ that ofBTEX compounds. However, the high surface to volume ratio ofmicron-sized bubbles enhances the in situ stripping capacity(partitioning from aqueous to gaseous phase) to allow effectiveextraction.

Oxidation Chemical Mechanisms

Referring to FIG. 12, primary and secondary reactions of MTBE with Ozoneare shown. Karpel vel Leitner, R. N., A. L Papailhous, J. P. Crove, J.Payrot, and M. Dore (1994) “Oxidation of Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE)and Ethyl tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) by Ozone and Combined Ozone/HydrogenPeroxide” Ozone Science and Engineering 16, 41-54, described reactionpathways of ozone and MTBE in dilute aqueous solution using controlledexperimental conditions. The primary reaction (90% of the consumed massof MTBE) results in the formation of tert-butyl formate and hydrogenperoxide. A second parallel reaction (less than 10% of the consumed massof MTBE) generates formaldehyde, TBA, and oxygen.

Initially, in the system 10 the peroxide is concentrated around theshell of the microbubbles. Since the peroxide will later decompose tooxygen and water, the surrounding groundwater will become highlyoxygenated. Oxygen contents in excess of 10 mg/L are common.

Oxidant Application and Spread

Clayton, W. S. 1998 “Ozone and Contaminant Transport During In-SituOzonation” Physical, Chemical, and Thermal Technologies, Remediation ofChlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds, pp. 389-395, G. B.Wickramanayake and R. E. Hinchee, Eds. Battelle Press, Columbus, Ohiodeveloped a simple model of ozone transport for a chemical subject tofirst-order degradation. Subsurface ozone transport is limited by ozonereaction as it moves through the soil. The importance of ozone reactionrates on ozone transport is illustrated by considering simplified radialtransport of ozone from an injection well. Clayton's equation, combiningthe well drawdown equation with the standard first-order decay equationyields:

C=C₀e^(−kt)=C₀e^(−[kπHnS) _(g) ^(R) ² _(/Q])

This equation is an analytical solution for steady-state radial gastransport subject to first-order decay where C is ozone concentrations;C₀ is the initial ozone concentration; k is the degradation constant of0.693/half-life; t is time; H is the height of flow zone; n is the soilporosity; S_(g) is the gas saturation (the fraction of ozone gas pervoid volume); R is the radial distance from the spargewell; and Q is theinjection rate.

The radius of influence “a” for pilot unit C-Sparge™ KerfootTechnologies, Inc. can be approximated as:

-   -   R˜6-7 meters if 5-6 m deep point    -   Z=6 m    -   0=soil porosity=0.25 (for sands)    -   Q=mass O₃/_(mass air)=12 gm/hr/5040 1/hr=0.0011 or 0.11%    -   S_(g)=1.0 (with continual purging, ozone/air replaces all    -   λ=3.14    -   k=0.03

If Q is increased while maintaining the ratio at 0.11%, the radiusincreases. By coating the ozone microbubble with hydroperoxide, thehalf-life of supplied ozone gas is extended.

Clayton assumed 5 to 45 minutes for ozone half-life in injected vadosezones or saturated zones (Clayton, 1998). By conducting a comparisonwith the same model, ozone half-lives can be from 5 to 30 hours in fieldsituations, where injection has been conducted for three weeks to sixmonths Kerfoot, W. B. and P. LeCheminant 2003, “Ozone MicrobubbleSparging at a California Site, Ch. 25 In MTBE Remediation Handbook, E.E. Moyer and P. T. Kostecki, Eds., Amherst Scientific Publishers,Amherst, Mass. This represents an improvement of 10 to 30 times theoriginally estimated ozone half-life.

Adjusting and maintaining molar ratio of oxidant to the organiccontaminant allows for an efficient reaction without excessive unrelatedproducts or byproducts. Petroleum spills release a complex mixture oforganic compounds into soils and groundwater during dispersion. Thecompounds can be separated by their chemical composition, volatility,solubility, and partitioning between gas, liquid, and adsorbed phases.The efficiency of treatment by pulsed air (oxygen at 20%), ozone/air,and hydroperoxide-encapsulated oxygen/ozone can be gauged by the massremoval (decomposition) of the petroleum fraction versus the mass ofoxygen supplied. The mass removal ratio can be compared to thestoichiometric ratio expected as a measure of efficiency of treatment.

The need to measure the efficiency of removal of a target chemical ofconcern (COC) is necessary since the mass of oxidation should besufficient to achieve levels of aqueous and soil concentrations ofclasses of Response Action Outcomes consistent with risk management.With gaseous injection, the rate of removal is defined, particularly incertain states and countries (i.e., Massachusetts, The Netherlands),which require analyses of both groundwater (GW) and soil (S) for closureon a site. For evaluation purposes, the following expression is used tocompare with process stoichiometric ratios:

${EF}_{ox} = {\frac{{oxidant}\mspace{20mu} {mass}\mspace{14mu} {utilized}}{\left. {{\Sigma \left( {{COC}_{e} - {COC}_{o}} \right)}_{gw} + \left( {COC}_{e} \right) - {COC}_{o}} \right)_{s}} = {\frac{\Delta \; O_{x}}{\Delta \; C}.}}$

Where: EF_(ox)=oxidation efficiency

-   -   ΔC=change in carbon content (gms)    -   ΔO_(x)=change in oxidant delivered (or oxygen delivered) (gms)    -   COC_(o)=start concentration of contaminant of concern    -   COC_(e)=end concentration of contaminant of concern    -   GW=in groundwater    -   S=in soil sediments

The advantage of such a measure is that it can be compared directly witha well-mixed, completely reacted stoichiometric ratio of treatmentmaterials to contaminants (for example, HVOCs, BTEX, MTBE, PAHs,alkanes). In complex mixtures of petroleum spills, the form of carboncan switch from one compound to another because of reactive processes(hydroxylation, carboxylation, condensation). The use of a ratio ofreduction of total organic carbon (TOC) to oxidant supplied may bebetter suited for measuring oxidative efficiency.

The field of wet air oxidation (WAO) has employed the concept for sometime of aboveground reactors (Hao and Phull, 1994). The finalrepresentation of oxygen utilization versus carbon removal is directlyconvertible to carbon dioxide end product production. The followingratios (TABLE 2) have been observed during the past five years ofmicrobubble ozone injection.

TABLE 2 Observed Oxidation Efficiencies Compared to StoichiometricRequirements (gmO₃ to gmC) Observed Ozone Molar Gram OxidationEquivalents Equivalents Efficiency MTBE 5.0 2.7 3.0 BTEX 6.2 3.2 3.0-3.6Benzene 5 3.07 Toluene 6 3.13 Ethylbenzene 7 3.16 Xylenes 7 3.16Naphthalene 8.0 3.0 3.0 TPH (C₆-C₃₆) 8.0 3.4 1.1-1.8

The rapid field removal rates of MTBE seem to have a commonstoichiometry, which approaches a theoretical ratio of 3 grams ozone to1 gram MTBE, close to the 2.7 gram equivalents described by Karpel velLeitner (1994). (See for instance, Kerfoot, “Ozone Microsparging forRapid MTBE Removal” The Chemical Oxidation Reactive Barriers, BattellePress Columbus Ohio (2000); Wheeler et al., “In Situ Ozone Remediationof MTBE in Groundwater” presented at The 17th Annual InternationalConference on Groundwater Soils and Sediments Oct. 22-25, (2001),University of Massachusetts Amherst Mass.; and Nichols et al,“Evaluation of an Ozone Air Sparging Test to Remediate Groundwater onLong Island N.Y.” in Groundwater” presented at The 17th AnnualInternational Conference on Groundwater Soils and Sediments Oct. 22-25(2001) in University of Massachusetts Amherst Mass.) With BTEXconstituents, usually the rate of removal of toluene exceeds that ofbenzene, xylenes, and ethylbenzene (Kerfoot, 2000) but corresponds to anoxidation efficiency of 3.0 to 3.6 grams ozone to grams COC removed.

Laminar Spargepoint®

The laminar Spargepoints® (or equivalent) are used to inject ozone andhydrogen peroxide or other liquid into the ground. The laminarSpargepoints® are made of a microporous flouropolymer material, ormicroporous stainless steel. As the ozone and hydrogen peroxide arepumped into the points, they are pushed out through the micro-pores,forming a hydrogen peroxide encapsulated ozone bubble. The contents ofthe bubble react with the contamination in the ground. Ozone may also beinjected through microporous ceramic diffusers below liquid introductionby microporous or slotted screens.

Tubing

The tubing forms the connections between the C-Sparger® control paneland the hydrogen peroxide control panel to the laminar Spargepoints®.There are two types of tubing used. One is high density polyethylene orKynar, depending upon O₃ concentration for the lateral runs from thecontrol panels to the wells. The other is Teflon® in the control panelsand for the hydrogen peroxide flow from the wellhead to the laminarSpargepoint®. Other types of tubing that are resistant to ozone andhydrogen peroxide can be used.

Pulsing, Siphoning, and Residence Time for Maximizing Efficiency

Adjusting downwards the size of gas bubbles allows sufficiently slowrise time to allow adequate residence time for gas/aqueous reactions togo to completion. Pulsing allows the introduction of gas bubbles, coatedwith liquid or surrounded by liquid (if bubble diameter is equal to orgreater than capillary pore size) to be introduced, and reside in thevicinity of the compounds of concern for reaction and move upwardsduring the next pressure event. Rise time in saturated sands issubstantially reduced by reducing the diameter of the emittedmicrobubbles.

If a continuous gas flow were used instead of intermittent, a continuousgas channel would be produced (as envisioned by Clayton (1998)).Interfering with liquid coating of the gas bubbles, lowering efficiencyof reaction by rapidly transporting unreacted ozone gas into the vadosezone. Producing a continual gas flow (greater than 10 cfm through 0.010inch slots, 1 meter long, 2 inches in diameter) can provide vertical gastravel times of greater than 2 meters/minute. In comparison, fine bubbleproduction (0.5 to 50 micron size), can result in vertical travel timesof 0.01 to 0.1 meters/minute. By extending the half-life of ozone from0.5 to 30 hours, the residence time for reaction in a 6-meter verticalcontaminated zone increases from 60 to 600 minutes, approaching thehalf-life of ozone.

Siphoning Effect

The movement of fine gas bubbles coated with liquid produces a lowerpressure as the bubbles are injected out into the formation throughLaminar Spargepoints®.

The higher the necessary gas pressure for operation against formationbackpressure, the greater the negative pressure siphoning in liquid.This phenomenon may reflect smaller size microbubbles with highersurface to volume ratios evolving from Boyle's Law of Pressure,requiring more liquid to cover the emitted gas volume. Surface tensionof the liquid would cause more liquid to be delivered.

The process adds the oxidant (e.g., ozone) to in-situ oxidize an organiccompound stoichiometrically in the soil and groundwater withoutproducing an adverse condition of Eh or pH in the formation at theendpoint. A Pourbaix diagram is a diagram that is commonly used fordiscussing the general relations between redox activity and Bronstedacidity. The regions mapped in the diagram indicate the conditions of pHand potential under which each molecular species is stable.

Pourbaix diagrams for chromium and iron species are presented in FIGS.13 and 14. The pH changes from 6.3 to 7.8 during oxidant injection. TheEh rose from near 0 to just below 0.4 volts. As long as the Eh ismaintained below 0.4 and pH is not allowed to go above 8.0, hexavalentchromium should not be produced from the trivalent species.

With iron species, the ferrous (Fe²⁺) species may be completelyconverted to the ferric trivalent species (Fe³⁺) as Fe (OH)₃. Eventhough the amount of iron species is greater than the target organiccompounds, very effective removal of MTBE, BTEX, and TPH fractionsoccurs consistent with oxidant addition. The overall Eh and pH of theaquifer can be adjusted to the continual release of the oxidant. Thechanges in compound removal, Eh, and pH are capable of being reviewed onPourbaix diagrams and adjusted as needed by varying the x, y, and zamounts of each component. A certain amount of the sorbed organics maybe directly oxidized, but desorption appears to play a greater role,followed by reaction of the solubilized species. Pulsed injection of gasand liquid can reduce formation of byproducts and intermediate products.The oxidation state of the aqueous phase metals (iron, chromium) isclearly a function of the electron/proton activity.

Referring to FIG. 15, the stability field of water is shown. Thevertical axis is the reduction potential of redox materials in water,with those above the upper line being capable of oxidizing water andthose below being capable of reducing water. The gray lines are theboundaries when over potential is taken into consideration, and thebroken vertical lines represent the normal pH range for natural waters.The gray area is the stability field for natural waters.

Example Compounds

The following compounds have shown to be good examples for ozone andPerozone™ treatment: gasoline and fuel oil spills, including MTBE, TBA,BTEX, naphthalenes, PAHs (polyaromatic hydrocarbons), and TPH (alkanesand alkenes). Secondly, the wood preservatives, pentachlorophenol (PCP),tetrachlorophenol (TCP), and Stoddard solvent have shown effectiveremoval.

Transuranic Compounds

In addition to the removal of the previously-mentioned organiccompounds, certain transuranic compounds (radioactive species) may besoluble at low Eh and pH ranges. By adjusting the Eh and pH to oxidizedconditions, Eh>1 volts, and pH>4.0, plutonium species may beprecipitated on-site. The production of oxidative zones in barrier linesmay be capable of limiting migration of the transuranics in the aquifer.

A number of embodiments of the invention have been described.Nevertheless, it will be understood that various modifications may bemade without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.Accordingly, other embodiments are within the scope of the followingclaims.

1. A method of treating a soil or water formation comprising: receivinga signal from a sensor and determining an oxidation potential of thesoil/water formation based on the signal from the sensor; selecting anoxidant or reductant based on a determined oxidation potential of thesoil/water formation; and introducing the oxidant or reductant into thesoil/water formation.
 2. The method of claim 1 further comprisingintroducing the oxidant or reductant under conditions to allow foradjustment of the determined oxidation potential of the soil/waterformation.
 3. The method of claim 2 wherein introducing includesintroducing air and ozone into the soil through an elongate member withmicroporous sidewalls.
 4. The method of claim 2 wherein introducingincludes introducing air and ozone as a gas and the hydroperoxide and/orhydrogen peroxide as a liquid into the elongate member with microporoussidewalls.
 5. The method of claim 2 further comprising includingpromoters or nutrients such as catalyst agents including iron containingcompounds such as iron silicates or palladium containing compounds suchas paladized carbon and platinum in the elongate member with microporoussidewalls.
 6. The method of claim 2 further comprising emitting bubblesin a size range of about 1 to 200 microns from elongate member withmicroporous sidewalls.
 7. The method of claim 1 further comprisingadjusting the oxidation potential of the soil to decompose a contaminantwhile minimizing production of unwanted chemical byproducts.
 8. Themethod of claim 1 further comprising: introducing the selected oxidantor reductant into the soil/water formation, through a well; andmonitoring the oxidation potential of the soil/water formation.
 9. Themethod of claim 1 further comprising introducing the oxidant as anair/ozone gas stream delivered with a hydroperoxide,
 10. The method ofclaim 9 further comprising selecting the hydroperoxide from the groupconsisting of hydrogen peroxide, formic peracid, hydroxymethylhydroperoxide, 1-hydroxylethyl hydroperoxide, and chloroformic peracidor their derivatives.
 11. The method of claim 9 wherein thehydroperoxide delivered to the site is determined as being a substantialbyproduct of a reaction of a volatile organic compound present in theaquifer or soil formation with the air/ozone gas.
 12. The method ofclaim 9 further comprising delivering the hydroperoxide as a surfacelayer over microfine bubbles of air/ozone gas.
 13. The method of claim 1further comprising adjusting the oxidation potential of the soil todecompose compounds while minimizing transferring trivalent chromium tohexavalent chromium while decomposing polyaromatic hydrocarbons presentin the site.
 14. The method of claim 1 wherein introducing includes airand ozone as a gas and sodium permanganate as a liquid into the elongatemember with microporous sidewalls.
 15. The method of claim 1 furthercomprising: introducing a reductant gas as microbubbles to decomposecompounds while minimizing production of unwanted chemical byproducts.16. The method of claim 1 further comprising introducing the reductantas nitrogen or helium diluted hydrogen, or hydrogen sulfide for shortperiods of time followed by redox adjustment back, close to preexistingconditions.
 17. The method of claim 16 further comprising injectinghydrogen sulfide (H.sub.2S) as the reductant gas to the site, asmicrobubbles to decompose compounds while minimizing production ofunwanted chemical byproducts.
 18. The method of claim 1 furthercomprising introducing the oxidant under conditions to allow foradjustment of the determined oxidation potential of the soil/waterformation.
 19. The method of claim 1 further comprising: delivering areductant to a first elongate member with microporous sidewalls from afirst mechanism and a delivering a liquid from a second mechanism to asecond elongate member with microporous sidewalls.
 20. The method ofclaim 19 further comprising forming a liquid coating over the reductant.21. The method of claim 19 further comprising delivering the reductantfrom the first elongate member with microporous sidewalls from adistance below the second elongate member with microporous sidewalls 22.The method of claim 1 further comprising: delivering an oxidant to afirst elongate member with microporous sidewalls from a first mechanismand a delivering a liquid from a second mechanism to a second elongatemember with microporous sidewalls.
 23. The method of claim 22 furthercomprising forming a liquid coating over the oxidant.
 24. The method ofclaim 22 further comprising delivering the oxidant from the firstelongate member with microporous sidewalls from a distance below thesecond elongate member with microporous sidewalls